Anti-vaxxers unite!
Sadly I have gone back and read the dumpster fire because I wanted to understand if I missed something. I didnât.
Itâs not conclusive, but it does fit my feeling that the amount of modding that goes on here is so minimal that itâs personal feelings and grudges that is driving this whole controversy rather than actual actions.
As in they donât like some of the opinions that Wookie has expressed as a poster and canât separate that from what actions he has actually taken as mod.
5 Likes
Ding ding ding! Exactly. Going back and reading it all last night this is exactly what happened.
Hippity-hoppity, abolish private property 
This is weak evidence for a number of reasons: the data are too vague; bare rates of banning arenât very indicative especially considering the charge of bias is partially if not primarily qualitative; microbet has consciously adopted a more hands-on approach in light of demands for more modding etc.
When people say bias I interpret this as meaning that certain unpopular posters are sometimes subject to less favourable treatment than other, more popular posters, in situations otherwise very similar. That doesnât seem controversial to me â in fact, it seems inevitable, which is why Iâm not angry about any of this. Itâs also why regular mod rotation is the answer.
4 Likes
In general, I agree and we were making real progress yesterday but the anti-reality crowd still insisted on clogging the pipes with their crap. On the same day a poll went 90/10 against them jal, keed, victor and yul were still making the same arguments and doing everything possible to stifle the creation of the very rules they claim to want so badly.
They donât want rules changes. They want chaos.
Totally agree it is very weak evidence. But itâs ACTUAL evidence. Over thousands of posts now the other side has posted none. I read it all last night to see if I missed something. You will note I posted just yesterday that I held no position on all this and we were making real progress to get a rule change.
Two things changed.
I read it all and several of the same people were in here trying to throw as many roadblocks as possible in front the people trying to create the very rules they claim to want.
Of course there will be bias against some posters in a community of 250 people. However, as I said in an earlier post today the bias has clearly been in the direction of this small group of posters getting way more rope than other members of the community. The mods have been downright monk-like in their treatment of this after having gone back and read it all.
No idea what this has to do with anything but ok.
For the record only one of those two should be banned and for reasons that have zero to do with this discussion.
Fed up. Not hysterical.
Whoever it was that predicted youâd use the results of your poorly worded poll as a cudgel sure did nail that prediction. Who was that?
If I disagree with you that there is no other way to interpret the kerfuffle does that mean Iâm an anti vaxxer or bad faith?
5 Likes
If you donât post actual evidence, yes.
Post actual evidence and Iâll happily concede.
I havenât demanded anyone be banned. In fact, I explicitly said they shouldnât be banned.
Iâll never make another post on this issue for the rest of my life if the small group of posters do the same.
IDK I think theyâve all pointed to various instances of decisions they consider to have been the product of bias. That is in itself weak evidence. My point is only that just because your evidence is rooted in values, numbers, quantities etc doesnât make it particularly useful.
And obviously you get that, I understand youâre just using microbetâs post as a sort of rhetorical cudgel to make your point. Your point made, letâs stop waving the cudgel around, shall we?
Clearly, the various allegations made by certain posters of unfair treatment donât satisfy you that there is some âbiasâ, however weâre defining that. And thereâs no reason it should, necessarily. So â what would you expect this evidence to look like, if it were presented to you?
1 Like
Lol just lol victoar. I donât know what you are doing but just lol.
I LITERALLY just posted minutes ago that I donât want you gone. I posted the same of jal just yesterday.
Just lol.
I hope this is all fun for you.
Edit. I mean I really just donât know what is going on here if not just pure joker-like desire for chaos. I was posting, not a few days ago, how you have been a good poster lately. You know that.
UP likes censoring potentially misogynistic wordsâŚ
Hysterical
The word hysterical derives from the Greek word for uterus. It usually gets tossed around as a description for emotional women and feeds into the sexist stereotype that women are ânaturallyâ crazy. (Male) doctors had a bunch of weird ideas about the biology of women that they used to rationalize sexist beliefs. These ideas still have influence today, but when it comes to gender, the unscientific advice from centuries ago doesnât apply.
(For the record I do not believe everyone using this word is a misogynist)
1 Like
I agree with you they have made claims of bias many times but itâs just not convincing. They havenât convinced the community after two months of waging a near daily war across many threads.
An honest self-reflective group would think to themselves âok we tried to make our point many times and donât seem to be getting anywhere. It seems the majority of our community disagree with us. We have three options now; 1) accept that maybe we were interpreting things incorrectly based on feedback from a large part of our community, 2) accept that we have a different opinion and further accept that this is inevitable in any community. We wonât always agree so let it go, 3) continue to wage an endless battle with no hope for victory that makes this place less fun for everyone.â
I would hope they choose some combination of 1 and 2.
Iâll say jal has admirably mostly stayed out of this the last couple days. I really appreciate that. He seems to have chosen 1/2.
I mean the half dozen or so posters who want this can keep screaming for it, but it keeps failing in poll after poll when the poll isnât worded as lol lifetime appointments is the only alternative to term limits.
1 Like
There have been a few times mods have threatened people in ways they shouldnât have. But mods are human and they are just regular posters. They have also argued with posters and so have I. Thatâs part of my point about rotating mods. It shouldnât be that big a deal to be modded and mods will be less of authority figures and more people will understand if the job is temporary and people share it.
Iâm more on the side of the people youâre talking about because of the behavior of other posters, not because of the behavior of other mods.
7 Likes
Right, but now your case has moved from âWhereâs the evidence, show me the evidenceâ to âI donât believe them and neither do most peopleâ which may be true, but itâs a very different thing to be saying. And it moves your charge against them from âfailing to provide evidenceâ to âfailing to shut up when not believedâ, also quite different.
Like I said, I think of it as a group of posters who are less well-liked by mods and well-established regs than others. I think itâs inevitable that those groups will be treated somewhat differently. And one way or another, regular mod rotation will fix that â either the inconsistent treatment is abated (or temporarily redistributed) or it becomes clear that the mods canât be the problem.
4 Likes